[Scpg] Sharon Astyk: Facing the Zoning monster

[LBUZZELL at aol.com]

_http://sharonastyk.com/2009/02/12/facing-the-zoning-monster/_ 
(http://sharonastyk.com/2009/02/12/facing-the-zoning-monster/)    



_Facing the Zoning Monster_ 
(http://sharonastyk.com/2009/02/12/facing-the-zoning-monster/) 
 
_Sharon_ (http://sharonastyk.com/author/admin/)  February  12th, 2009
Over  the last 50 years, food and zoning laws have worked to minimize 
subsistence  activities in populated areas.  Not only have we lost the culture of  
subsistence, but we’ve instituted legal requirements that make it almost  
impossible for many people to engage in simple subsistence activities that cut  
their energy use, reduce their ecological impact, improve their food security  and 
improve their communities.  In some cases, these laws were instituted  for 
fairly good reasons, in many cases, for bad ones that associate such  activities 
with poverty. 
In  fact, scratch most of the reasons for these things, and you’ll find class 
issues  under their surface in the name of “property values.”  There are 
ostensible  reasons for these things, but generally speaking, the derive from old 
senses of  what constituted wealth - and what constituted wealth was 
essentially having  things that don’t do anything of economic value, but show that you 
can  afford.  It is important to remember that many things we think are ugly  
because of their class associations are not inherently ugly - that is, a lush 
 garden is not inherently more ugly than a lawn (quite the contrary), nor are 
 colorful clothes on a line inherently unattractive.  What we find beautiful  
has to do with our culture and our training, otherwise how could anyone have  
ever found a 800K McMansion beautiful? 
Among  the basic subsistence activities legislated against by towns, cities 
and housing  developments are: 
1.  Clotheslines instead of dryers.  Reason: Looks poor.  Might suggest  you 
can’t afford a dryer.  Plus, you might see underwear that isn’t your  own.  
This is a major cause of sin. 
2.  No livestock, but large pets are acceptable. Reason: Ostensible reasons 
are  health based, a few even broadly grounded in fact, real reason is that 
pets,  which have no purpose other than companionship and cost money, are  
broadly a sign of affluence, while livestock are a sign of poverty, because  they 
provide economic benefits. 
3.  No front yard gardens.  Reason: The lawn is a sign of affluence - you 
have  money, leisure and water enough to have a chunk of land, however tiny, that 
 doesn’t produce.  It creates in many neighborhoods a seemingly contiguousm,  
but basically sterile and safe seeming ”public” greenspace that is actually  
privatized and not very green.  Gardens, on the other hand, have dirty  
wildlife and bugs in them, and might grow food, which is bad because it implies  
you can’t afford it - even if you can’t.  
4.  No rainwater collection.  Reason: This is mostly in dry places in the  
Southwest, for fear that the tiny amount of available rainwater might not reach  
people who can’t afford to pay for it, or strangely believe that water that  
lands on their roof might belong to them,  and who would like to have  gardens 
anyway.  A few other municipalities do it for fear of west nile  disease 
because they seem never to have heard of screens or mosquito  dunks.  Oh, and 
barrels look like you can’t afford to water your lawn with  sprinklers, even when 
it is raining. 
5.  No commerce of any kind. Reason: This often does not include white collar 
 telecommuters who can make money out of their homes all they want, or 
upscale  white collar professionals with home offices.  Instead this means people  
who want to sell food, do hair, fix things, etc…  This is deemed ugly and  bad 
- and it is a visible reminder that people might not have enough money to  
keep warm burning it, and might need to earn some. 
Now  I realize I’m being a little bit unkind.  People have real aesthetic  
concerns - but a law that outlaws even tasteful gardens or small tasteful  signs 
that say “eggs” on them, or a town that tries to keep its “traditional”  “
colonial” or “small town” feel without actually allowing any of the  
characteristics of traditional, colonial or small town life is creating a  sterile 
Disneyland as well as destroying long term environmental, economic  and food 
security. 
The  reality is that clothes on the line aren’t empirically ugly.  
Neighborhood  cats carry more diseases than backyard poultry.  If you can put a 
political  sign on your lawn, you should be able to put a sign that says “fresh baked  
goods” on it - hell, food security is political! 
That  means that these laws can’t be allowed to stand.  And that means that  
one of the first things you or your community, your transition group or your  
neighbors can do is to push to change your zoning laws or your neighborhood  
covenants.    
That  means you need to get involved.  Go to the town meetings.  Get to know  
you zoning board.  Talk to your neighbors.  Strategize - can you find  some 
people who want chickens to get together with?  Find out what the  objections 
are and address them - if people are afraid of bird flu, remind them  that bird 
flu is largely a problem of industrial production.  If people  think that 
lawns are beautiful and food gardens are ugly, show them  otherwise.  Show them 
that other towns are doing it - remind them that  Seattle allows chickens and 
that there is a national “Right to Dry”  law.  
If  the law won’t help you, consider whether you are willing to consider 
civil  disobedience.  Unjust laws need to be overturned - you don’t have to go to  
jail to be Thoreau, sometimes you just need to plant some kale.  But before  
you do that, do know the price you may have to pay - make sure you are willing 
 to pay it.  Someone with courage who is willing to pay a price may have to  
go first - and if you have the willingness to be the one to fight that battle, 
 well, all honor to you. 
The  reality is that some of the zoning restrictions and covenants will fade 
as times  get tougher, but we really can’t afford to wait for things to be 
really bad to  get our chickens - because it will likely to be harder to come by 
diverse stock  then.  We can’t wait to grow food until we’re already hungry.  
We  can’t wait to collect water until our well is dry.  It is worth fighting  
these battles right now - particularly since many of them truly are rooted in 
 ugly prejudice against the poor,  and separation from our agrarian  past. 
Well,  most Americans couldn’t get much more separate from our roots, so that’
s sort of  silly. And bit by bit, people are bringing clotheslines and front 
yard gardens  back, and making them cool again.  But we can’t wait for that to 
happen -  because the reality is that many of us will be poor, and the 
utility of these  activities will be needed to soften our poverty. 
We  can’t wait until everyone sees a garden full of food as beautiful and  
lush.  Instead, we’ve got to make sure that even those who still think it  looks 
old fashioned and dirty don’t get to control something so basic as our  
future anymore. 
Sharon
 
 
 
 
 
 
 










**************Need a job? Find an employment agency near you. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000003)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.permaculture-guilds.org/pipermail/southern-california-permaculture/attachments/20090216/1ef75d07/attachment.html>